Want evolution to be a theory? Follow your beloved Scientific Method: observe EVOLUTION, test EVOLUTION, and repeat that test on EVOLUTION over and over until it can move beyond a hypothesis into a valid theory. Basically, evolve me something.

Follow your beloved Scientific Method: observe EVOLUTION, test EVOLUTION, and repeat that test on EVOLUTION over and over until it can move beyond a hypothesis into a valid theory. Basically, evolve me something.

So you claim that evolution isn't scientific?

First of all, we already have evolved several organisms, both in the lab and in the wild. E.coli bacteria able to digest citrate. Antibiotics-resistant new strains of bacteria. Even beetles which became resistant to insecticides. Voila, we evolved something.

Second, with the same "argument", you could claim that archeology, history studies or medieval literature studies aren't science.

"Rom831" has made nothing but a strawman argument here. A nicely disguised strawman argument, but still a strawman argument.

(Channeling Rom831): "Yeah, but they're still fruit flies! They didn't turn into dogs or anything, so that's not evolution. Ha! You lose, I win! Praise the Lord! I'm going on RR and bragging about how I socked it to some dumb atheist!"

We've already proved evolution, from what I can tell. Dachshund vs. Lab vs. Shih Tzu vs. Wolf. Seriously, this does actually bug me. Why are dogs not considered ultimate proof of evolution, since we can prove these breeds haven't always existed?